It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Battleship Sized Tank proposals

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2008 @ 07:43 PM
link   
These tanks have not come off the board, but rather concepts though. They would have used Battleship Turrets and Engine Blocks to manufacture them.

strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us...





posted on May, 18 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   
The concept is so interesting. That webpage is wonderful. You deserve a star.



posted on May, 18 2008 @ 10:19 PM
link   
I don't have much to add here but I just wanted to say that that was an absolutely brilliant find. Thanks for the fine reading material!



posted on May, 18 2008 @ 10:26 PM
link   
This may be a surprise to many but when it comes to machines of war anything goes including tanks. Very informative and thanks for the information. Rik Riley



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Great info.

For practical purposes, I would have to say these mammoth tanks would be a waste. At first, they would be intimidating. But once the enemy gets over the shock, its game over for these massive tanks. After all, bigger on the battlefield doesn't mean better. But it guarantees that you are a bigger and easier to hit target.

That's probably why two legged tanks, like Mechwarrior, would not be practical. They're big and tall. Expensive to make. And probably the first thing everyone shoots at in a combat situation. Plus, the legs make them so vulnerable.

BTW, you get a star for a great read.

[edit on 19-5-2008 by guppy]



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   
all other problems aside - the development and deployment of such a monster could not be kept secret

now i cannot claim to know how WWII allied commanders would have responded

but - ` if i ran the zoo ` - i would aquire 6" and 8"" naval AP shells from cruiser armnents - and determine how to safley fire them from existing 6" and 8" terrestrial howitzers - ie correct powder charge - etc etc

when the ` land cruizer ratte ` rolled into action - it would be come under barrage fire

from both direct fire tubes - in pre prepared positions [ it would be a lot easer and faster to dig concealed firing positions in the expected line of advance than for ratte to take evassive action ]

and plunging fire from distant batteries

and comparing the stated armour values of ratte with the penetration figures for naval AP shells - i predict ratte would not survive the first hit



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 05:37 PM
link   
This was great find. I enjoyed reading the site and learned some new and interesting information. Thanks,



posted on May, 19 2008 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Thats Rob Arndt's webpage if I am not very much mistaken.

He has spent a lot of time and research on the website and it is a very good read, you do not realise how huge it is and he has certainly helped me out identifying anomalous photos taken in Germany during the war.

Just to illustrate two ends of scale in war do not overlook the Nazi Pigeon.



Nazi-trained homing pigeons were the target of British covert operations during WWII, it has emerged.
Scores of lofts of the message-carrying birds were pinpointed by MI5 agents in 1940 across Belgium, West Holland and the Balkans.
The airborne threat was believed to be the pet project of SS chief Heinrich Himmler - who was known by British intelligence as an avowed pigeon fancier.
Under interrogation, captured "German pigeon personnel" told how the birds were a vital component of Hitler's plans to invade Britain.
The MI5 report on the phenomenon, released with a batch of wartime secret service documents this week, said: "From these prisoners of war it was learnt that it was anticipated that the birds would be used to convey information obtained by short-term pre-invasion agents."


Or the BRITISH SUICIDE PIGEON WEAPON.




British spy chiefs secretly considered training pigeons to fly into German targets carrying explosives or biological weapons, it has been revealed.
British intelligence set up a "pigeon committee" at the end of World War II to ensure expertise gained in the use of the birds to carry messages was not lost.
Documents now released to the National Archives reveal that the War Office intelligence section, MI14, warned: "Pigeon research will not stand still; if we do not experiment, other powers will."
Among MI14's proposals was the training of pigeons carrying explosives to fly into German searchlights.
Meanwhile, pigeon enthusiast Wing Commander WDL Rayner suggested a "bacteriological warfare agent" could be combined with the explosive.

"A thousand pigeons each with a two ounce explosive capsule, landed at intervals on a specific target, might be a seriously inconvenient surprise," Mr Rayner wrote.
He believed his "revolutionary" ideas could change the way wars were fought, and had the tentative backing of wartime MI6 chief Sir Stewart Menzies.
However the internal security service MI5 branded Rayner a "menace in pigeon affairs".
MI5's Lieutenant Colonel Tommy Robertson wrote: "I thought that some time ago it had been made clear that Rayner should finish writing his manual and then have nothing further to do with this committee officially."
Rayner's plan for a 400-pigeon loft where tests would be carried out was abandoned due to wrangling among the intelligence agencies over funding.


Amazing isn't it


strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us...

edit for link

[edit on 19-5-2008 by sherpa]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 10:10 AM
link   
here are some concept art of the ratte






the website is - www.vincelewis.net...



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 10:21 AM
link   
here is a website i found - www.vincelewis.net...



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Cutaway
 


looks like a great sitting duck for air strikes or cruise missiles
even if these concepts where taken into production they wouldnt really be feasable in the battle the field.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
If these machines were capable of AA and had a batallion of AA vehicles and weapons traveling with them then they'd be viewed as quite the disparaging land fleet, dominating all other terrestrial combat vehicles and capabilities at the time of implimentation. Definitely astonishing, like a naval fleet with wheels.

[edit on 24-5-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by bodrul
 


i don`t know about cruise missiles - but the USAAF had the AZON guided bomb and others

see this weblink

quite primative - but it allowed the USAAF to attack trains and bridges that had very good AAA [ anti aircraft artilery ] defences from HIGHT altutude

now if they can hit bridges and trains - the masive target of the land-cruiser wil be targetable too

now mate AZON guidance with AP [ armour piercing ] bombs used by the USN to attack battleships

and you have another ratte killer



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


the V1 was the first cruise missile

well tec speaking anyway.

edit:
i know it was german

edit my stupidity

[edit on 24-5-2008 by bodrul]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Great find


A couple of thoughts:

1)In todays battlefield it would be a sitting duck. A SDB could take out the turret with eash and then you just have an giant APC.

But for WWII it may have had been more practical given the weapons of the time.

It would not be very usefull against a mobile force, but against prepared positions like the Magiont line it would be quite aforce.

Its unlikely that that it would go anywhere without a 'Escort" like capital ships have. Some Panzers, AA, ground troops etc. Any kill would have to be a lucky drop from a CAS aircraft or close and dirty kill but the escorts would make it tough.

The other aspect people tend to forget is the terror value of such a weapon. the giant Krupps built cannon that shelled Paris in WWI did little real damage in terms of military, but cause alot of terror. That in and of itself had value in the WWII era. Imagine yourself manning a fixed line watching your bazoka rounds bounce off this monster. Are you going to hold position or bug out?



posted on May, 25 2008 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Great find


A couple of thoughts:

1)In todays battlefield it would be a sitting duck. A SDB could take out the turret with eash and then you just have an giant APC.


Why get fancy? An Abrams, Challenger, or LeClerc could ventilate the Ratte like a sieve if it showed up on the modern battlefield. I'm not even sure that the Ratte would have a range advantage. It might carry 280mm guns, but it doesn't seem to carry the fire control system to fire them at anything beyond open-sight range (I can't seem to find a range-finder or director anywhere).



But for WWII it may have had been more practical given the weapons of the time.

It would not be very usefull against a mobile force, but against prepared positions like the Magiont line it would be quite aforce.


It would even have problems against decent fixed fortifications. Given its size and expense, it's the obvious first target for just about any and everything that will bear. Given its limited ammunition supply (even the naval versions of those guns had ~100 rounds / gun, and the Ratte lacks their multi-deck magazine spaces, so it probably carries considerably less), the Ratte is going to beat the absolute goose-grease out of a small number of targets before shooting its magazines dry, and having to retire under fire.



Its unlikely that that it would go anywhere without a 'Escort" like capital ships have. Some Panzers, AA, ground troops etc. Any kill would have to be a lucky drop from a CAS aircraft or close and dirty kill but the escorts would make it tough.


Naval dive bomber crews were surprisingly accurate, with practice...and their targets tended to be moving a lot faster, have at least as many AA guns escorting them, and a lot more AA guns mounted on them. I'd be willing to lay good money on a USN dive-bombing squadron scoring at least a couple of hits (1943 or later), or an IJN squadron scoring several (up until 1943, assuming Japan and Germany were at odds). If you aren't willing to call in the Navy and their specialist dive bomber crews, I'm sure that there would be plenty of P-47 pilots willing to demonstrate proficiency.



The other aspect people tend to forget is the terror value of such a weapon. the giant Krupps built cannon that shelled Paris in WWI did little real damage in terms of military, but cause alot of terror. That in and of itself had value in the WWII era. Imagine yourself manning a fixed line watching your bazoka rounds bounce off this monster. Are you going to hold position or bug out?



From what I've heard, bazooka crewmen were used to seeing their rounds bounce.

The terror from the Paris Gun (and its World War II cousins, the V-1 and V-2) was a product of the inability to reply to or counter the weapon, more than a product of the weapon's damage. In the case of the Ratte, there's no lack of ways to reply to it directly (indirect-fire artillery), or counter it (bombing comes to mind). It would most assuredly be a shock, but it would probably cause more casualties among the Allied forces after its defeat than before. Can you imagine the bloodbath that's going to break out between the Americans (who want to ship the hulk back to Aberdeen for display), the Russians (who will want it for THEIR Great Patriotic War Museum), and the folks from Bovington? Ewww...even by Rugby standards, that's gonna be ugly!



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join